Mr Man wrote:Well the realization could be something that develops and deepens (over time) and it could be a deepening in faith (see IanAnd's earlier post) rather than a moment of insight into the nature of self. Possibly the manifestation is not consistent.

Just to be clear here. Contrary to Mr. Man's perception about what I wrote, I would not describe what I was talking about as a "deepening in faith" but rather a moment of recognition of "this is it!" Faith, to me in this sense, implies a kind of not-knowingness, an acceptance without knowing. In the sense in which I am speaking here, a moment of recognition is a moment of realization of factual knowledge, a recognition of a truth that one has previous to that moment not seen or realized. Words can only approximate the experience, and therefore are often inadequate to convey its poignancy.

When I say "a realization of factual knowledge" I mean actual first hand knowingness itelf. Indisputable knowing or knowledge! In the same way that Gotama realized his own freedom through having realized nibbana having sat and realized it under the Bodhi tree. I don't know how much more precise and specific I can be than this. If you want to call it a fruition, then call it a fruition. I call it realization.

In the moment that this realization occurred to me (it was in 2001), I KNEW that following the noble eightfold path would work to alleviate dukkha because this was virtually the same thing that had been taught me while in the religious Order. In the Order, however, all the details of how to accomplish this were left out (not divulged, kept from me), and it was only by reacquainting myself with (and deeply pondering) the path laid out by the noble eightfold path (as well as in the discourses where the details were expressed) that I realized "Yes, this WILL work! This IS what I've been searching for!" There was absolute knowingness and certainty. Doubt was not even on the radar screen in that moment! Doubt was non-existent.

This was the moment (to my way of thinking) I entered the stream. It was indisputable! And it didn't matter what anyone else's opinion was! I KNEW! In the very same way that Gotama KNEW!

Alex123 wrote:
This is what I am thinking myself. What if fetters, for most of us, slowly fade from 100% to 0% rather than go from 100% to 0% in two micro moments.

From my reading of the discourses, there are instances where people that Gotama met were described and pronounced to have become stream enterers or arahants who very quickly died shortly thereafter. There was no way for anyone to independently confirm what these people knew or didn't know prior to the moment of demise. And yet these pronouncements are accepted as established fact by followers of the faith. I find that to be an incredible jump to a conclusion, and one which, I don't think, even Gotama would approve were he alive to weigh in on this issue.

If you stop for a moment to think about this from an experiential perspective, and realize that your mind has been through an incredible amount of programming (conditioning) starting from the moment you were born and came into the world right up to this present moment. To expect that a moment of self-realization is going to instantly and quite miraculously wipe out all of that programming (conditioning) is quite astonishing and unrealistic! I mean, how many people do you personally know to whom this has occurred? I would venture to say that most (if not all) of you would say: No one! So, it is not realistic to expect to clear out the asavas in one fell swoop (so to speak), but rather over time in the same way that the programming (conditioning) was induced to become in place. This is not to say that it doesn't make this process easier to achieve (the clearing out of the asavas, that is), it does. But one asava at a time; not all in one fell swoop.

I'm referring here also to instances of realizing selflessness. Rooting out conceit (the most subtle instance of selfhood) is an ongoing process that takes time before no reaction pattern shows up on the radar screen of one's mind. It's going to show up in big ways and small, and you just have to become aware of its appearance in each instance and let go of it. That's how you root out conceit. There's no magic here; just hard and diligent mental work.

Hi IanAnd
Thanks for the clarification. The point I was trying to get at was that your realization (as described) seems more to do with path (putting aside doubt) rather than "nothing that can be taken as "true self" (See Zom's earlier post). The manifestation (or emphasis) seems different. Do you think that how "stream entry" is perceived is conditioned by our underlying tendencies?

And practically speaking, how would one recognise somebody with:
(i) no self-view;
(ii) weakened self-view?

- this is a difficult question, because many people do not speak about their self-views, simply because they just don't have them formulated, "vebalized" (because usually there is just no need for that). But they still have them, ofc. And if you will speak with them about this particular matter, you may hear them say - "Yes, I think that I'm this, I'm that, I'm my body, I'm my will, I'm my consciousness" and so on. If we are speaking about determining this in yourself by yourself, this is also aint easy to detect for 100%, simply because you may remove superficial clinging to such views, but the root will still be intact (in suttas this root is called "anusaya", underlying tendency).

I was thinking of it more on a practical day-to-day level. I've found from experience that I tend to experience a sense of self most strongly when I feel threatened in some way. So for example if I feel criticised, I might get defensive. My assumption is that I had overcome self-view, then I wouldn't react in this way. Does that make sense?

I'm not sure I follow. If we're talking about the conceit "I am", isn't this the same as self-view?

These are different. Self-view (sakkaya-ditthi) is the 1st, "lowest" samsara fetter, eradicted by a fruit of stream-entry, while conceit (mana) is the 10th, highest samsara fetter, eradicted by a fruit of arahantship. Between them there can lie a practice for 7 full lifetimes. So removing a conceit is much much harder than to remove a self-view. Conceit is like the roots, while self-view is like a foliage. Stream-entry is like a blow on the roots in such a way, that no foliage will ever appear, but the tree is still alive - though injured badly and because of that in "7 lifetimes" it will dry up and roots will perish -)

To speak more straight, self-view is ditthi, opinions, conceptions. Not more than that. For example, you have an opinion, that "This city is great and the best of all". This is ditthi. Due to some reasons you formed such a view. Later on, due to some other reasons, you may drop this ditthi and pick up another one, like: "That another city is the best in the world". And even keep clinging to this view for some prolonged period of time. In the suttas some people had such ditthi as: "I think that this world is not infinite" - or "I think it is infinite". These are also ditthi. And now self-view is also such ditthi - "I think, that my self - is that my consciousness. It is this consciousness will flow on and on and enter nibbana, going out of space and time (c)" -) Now this is view about self. Just an opinion, which you can grasp tightly. Or, for example, some pretty girl may say: "This my sexy body is my self, of course, and this is me, this is mine, this is what I am". May she? She may -) Quite rough self-view, but still - sakkaya-ditthi. Some mystic or esoteric may say thus: "Real "me" exists out of this body and even out of this mind, it is indecribable, there is no possibility to detect it!". Quite cool, philosophical and sublime self-view. But still - this is an opinion about "self".

And the conceit is another thing, it is more about "experience and feeling yourself" rather than pondering, thinking and imaginating. When some abuses you, you can feel "aggrieved ego" if you look carefully inside. This feeling can be strong, or it can be shallow, but that's it - this is a conceit. Extremely hard to remove this thing )

sakkāya-ditthi (personality-view) is the view that there is a self to be found in the pañc'upādāna-kkhandha. Having the view or believing that what constitutes "my personality" is one, more or all of the five clinging-aggregates, i.e. form, feeling etc. (pañc'upādāna-kkhandha). sakkāya-ditthi does not come about by not assuming the pañc'upādāna-kkhandha as being the self. but asmi māna, the conceit "I am" persists as long as there is craving (upādāna). Although one doesn't consider the pañc'upādāna-kkhandha as self, knowing that "I am" is a delusion, it still seems that I am as long as there is upādāna. Only by overcoming and letting go of upādāna the conceit "I am" ceases completely.

"There is the case, friend Visakha, where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — assumes form (the body) to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form.

"He assumes feeling to be the self...

"He assumes perception to be the self...

"He assumes (mental) fabrications to be the self...

"He assumes consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness. This is how self-identification comes about."

"But, lady, how does self-identification not come about?"

"There is the case where a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — who has regard for noble ones, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma; who has regard for men of integrity, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma — does not assume form to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form.

"He does not assume feeling to be the self...

"He does not assume perception to be the self...

"He does not assume fabrications to be the self...

"He does not assume consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness. This is how self-identification does not come about."

Alex123 wrote:
This is what I am thinking myself. What if fetters, for most of us, slowly fade from 100% to 0% rather than go from 100% to 0% in two micro moments.

From my reading of the discourses, there are instances where people that Gotama met were described and pronounced to have become stream enterers or arahants who very quickly died shortly thereafter.

Yes, there were few people who instantly realized this or that stage upon mere hearing. But thousands did not even though they lived under the Buddha himself. Something tells me that if one doesn't instantly upon reading the suttas and/or listening to Dhamma Talk becomes Aryan, then the path will, obviously, take longer than an instant.

"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."

Alex123 wrote:Something tells me that if one doesn't instantly upon reading the suttas and/or listening to Dhamma Talk becomes Aryan, then the path will, obviously, take longer than an instant.

On the flipside, all the bhikkhus in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta were ariya of different degrees.

Metta,
Retro.

Those who didn't disrobe priorly, and this is at the end of Buddha's 45 years of teaching... For most people it took longer than nano-second.

"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."

Hi IanAnd
For example some people seem naturally to have a strong confidence so "a realization of factual knowledge" would not be a giant change or some people seem naturally to have a strong belief in the value of rites and rituals so a realization that these practices are non-efficacious would be a giant change. So depending on our natural tendencies the way that stream entry is perceived would differ.